On Monday, September 15, 2025, the political landscape in Turkey was thrown into further uncertainty as a court in Ankara delayed a highly anticipated verdict in a case challenging the legitimacy of the main opposition party’s leadership election. The Republican People’s Party (CHP), Turkey’s oldest and most prominent opposition force, now faces weeks of suspense, with the trial adjourned until October 24. The decision, while only a temporary pause, has already set off a cascade of political, economic, and social ripples across the nation.
The case at the heart of this controversy revolves around the CHP’s 38th congress, held in 2023, which saw the ousting of long-time leader Kemal Kilicdaroglu and the election of Ozgur Ozel as chairman. The plaintiffs allege that the congress was marred by irregularities, including vote buying and procedural violations. According to Reuters, the case was brought by a disgruntled CHP member, not by the government itself. Nevertheless, the opposition party and its supporters are adamant that the lawsuit is part of a broader, politically motivated campaign to undermine their ranks.
Ozel, a combative and outspoken figure who has risen to national prominence since taking the helm, has not minced words about the stakes. During a rally in Ankara on Sunday, September 14, he called the ongoing crackdown a “judicial coup” and vowed to resist all moves that threaten to undermine the party’s autonomy and Turkey’s democratic traditions. “We will not allow Turkey’s oldest political party to be taken over by judicial means,” Ozel declared, according to Associated Press.
The government of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, now in his 22nd year of rule, has firmly rejected allegations of political interference. Officials insist that the judiciary remains impartial and that all investigations—whether into the CHP or other entities—are focused solely on rooting out corruption. Still, critics, including human rights groups and some European leaders, see the developments as part of a worrying slide toward autocracy. They point to a pattern of judicial and administrative actions targeting CHP municipalities and officials, especially after the party’s historic victory in last year’s local elections, where it swept most major cities in what Reuters called “the biggest ever defeat for Erdogan’s AKP.”
The legal crackdown began in October 2024 and has only intensified throughout 2025. Hundreds of CHP members, including Istanbul’s popular mayor Ekrem Imamoglu—widely regarded as Erdogan’s chief political rival—have been arrested or jailed pending trial on charges ranging from corruption to alleged links to terrorism. Imamoglu, who denies all charges, has been in pre-trial custody since his arrest in March, an event that sparked widespread protests and rattled Turkish markets.
Indeed, the economic impact of the political turmoil has been significant. The Turkish lira, stocks, and bonds all crashed in March when Imamoglu was jailed, forcing the central bank to briefly reverse its policy of interest rate cuts in an attempt to stabilize the situation. However, the market’s reaction to Monday’s adjournment was markedly different. According to Al-Monitor, Turkish markets and the lira gained ground following the news that the court would delay its ruling, suggesting that, for now, investors see the postponement as an avoidance of the worst-case scenario—at least temporarily.
But uncertainty remains the order of the day. As Ipek Ozkardeskaya of Swissquote told Reuters, “Uncertainties have merely been extended. The worst-case scenario has been avoided, yet foreign investors’ perception of Turkey’s policy environment and investment outlook remains unchanged.” The sense of unease is palpable, not just among investors but across Turkish society, as the opposition and its supporters brace for what could be a decisive moment in the country’s political evolution.
The court’s decision to adjourn also came with a rejection of plaintiff requests to immediately suspend Ozel and his administration. Instead, the judge ordered the CHP and relevant election boards to submit information on planned upcoming party congresses. This procedural move gives both sides more time to prepare, but it also prolongs a period of intense instability within the opposition camp.
If the court ultimately decides to annul the 2023 congress, several scenarios could unfold. Trustees might be appointed to oversee the party, or the court could reinstate Kemal Kilicdaroglu as chairman—a move that would likely deepen existing divisions within the CHP. Kilicdaroglu, who led the party through a string of electoral defeats against Erdogan, has signaled his willingness to return to leadership. However, as Associated Press and Reuters both note, he remains deeply unpopular among many party supporters, and his reinstatement could further fracture the already embattled opposition.
The legal and political drama has not been confined to the courtroom. Earlier this month, a court removed the CHP’s elected provincial leadership in Istanbul and appointed an interim chairman to oversee the local branch. Police used pepper spray to disperse party members and supporters who resisted the court-appointed official’s arrival at the party’s Istanbul headquarters, according to AP.
For many observers, the case has become a litmus test for the state of Turkish democracy. Seren Selvin Korkmaz, co-founder and co-director of the IstanPol Institute, told Reuters, “This is a serious moment that signals a regime change in Turkey from a competitive authoritarianism, in which opposition parties could still win elections, to a kind of hegemonic authoritarianism, in which they are more symbolic and unable to win.”
The government, for its part, points to last year’s local elections as evidence that Turkey remains a vibrant democracy. Officials and some analysts argue that the CHP’s sweeping victories in major cities show that the electoral playing field is still open, despite the opposition’s claims of judicial overreach.
Yet, the broader context cannot be ignored. The judiciary, army, media, and other institutions that once operated with greater independence are now widely viewed as being more closely aligned with Erdogan’s administration. The legal pressure on the CHP is seen by many as part of a strategic effort to weaken the opposition ahead of national elections scheduled for 2028, though some speculate those elections could be called earlier.
As the next court date looms, the CHP and its supporters face a daunting choice: continue their resistance in the streets and in the courts, or risk further fragmentation and loss of public trust. The outcome of this case will not only determine the future of the party’s leadership but could also reshape the contours of Turkish democracy for years to come.
For now, all eyes remain on Ankara, where the fate of the opposition—and perhaps the very nature of Turkey’s political system—hangs in the balance.